Features
SCHOOLCIO : A Plan for Technology Integration
4/27/2012 By: Bob Sprankle
I’ve been working on our school’s technology budget for next year, so I’m looking at our
“needs” and “wants” closely, knowing items in both categories will be cut due to dwindling
budgets that I’m sure most districts are well acquainted with.
Introducing new technologies into learning is not an easy process. Decision makers want
to examine data, other districts’ successes/struggles, and they want to make sure money is
being well spent. There are many approaches to adopting new technologies (or any educational
tools, for that matter). Thinking about these approaches inspired me to create a possible plan
for investing in and integrating new technologies. My plan laid out here is a “work in progress.”
Please visit techlearning.com/may12 to add your comments and suggestions (and don’t
hesitate to trash the entire thing and offer up your own plan!).
Purpose
I can’t tell you how many times I’ve had
educators approach me with something similar
to the following quote: “Okay, we just bought
500 iPod Touches (or other technology) for our
teachers/school/district. Now what do we do?”
This has always concerned me, as this is the
“cart before the horse” scenario. A lot of money
is often spent as schools or districts try to climb
aboard the Technology/21st Century Skill wagon
without first identifying Purpose.
Without thinking about Technology at
all, the process must start with identifying
the need. It could be something such as: “I want
my students to create work that is meaningful” or
“We want our teachers to communicate more
with parents and the community.” It might
be helpful to identify how these goals are
going to be accomplished with or without new
technology. This forces the question: are these
goals really imperative? In other words, do the
interested parties believe so strongly in these
goals that they will make sure they happen with
or without the purchase of new technologies?
Assessment
Schools fortunate enough to
have Technology Integrators or “tech-savvy”
colleagues are then able to go and ask those
folks what tools already exist to help achieve the
goals identified. There is a very real possibility
that in this part of the assessment phase, the
conclusion may be that new technologies may
not be necessary at all.
If new technologies are in fact identified,
another assessment that must take place
is to find out if the staff/teachers who will
be using the technology have “buy in.” It
is important to take a pulse on reactions,
perceptions, and feelings from those
who will be using the new tools. Are they
excited about the possibilities that the tools
offer, or do they feel that the new tools are
being forced upon them? This latter finding
doesn’t necessarily stop the process, but
it will be important to identify resistance
early on in order to later address possible
barriers of adoption during the Professional
Development phase.
Beta Test Group (with
Small amount of the
Identified Technology
acquired)
Find those teachers who are most
enthusiastic (or at least willing) to try out
the new technology. Also, start small with the
purchase of the technology. There’s no sense
buying Interactive White Boards or iPads
(for instance) for an entire school before
testing it out with a small group of teachers
first. Administrators/decision makers might
be inclined to supply everyone with the
technology in order to have equity. I believe
that using a Beta Test group first is the best
route because problems and struggles that
may arise with the implementation of the
tool(s) can be worked out more easily with a
smaller group. Not everyone has to tackle these
struggles together. Once all the kinks have been
worked out, the Beta group can alleviate much
of the anxiety and frustration for the larger
group if the technology is adopted. This allows
for a much more positive experience for the
new users.
Alternatively, the findings from the Beta Test
Group may be that the technology does not meet
the desired needs, or is not worth the costs, or
is too cumbersome or complicated to expect
widespread adoption.
Beta Group Assesses and
Reports Out
The Beta Group defines the pros and cons
of adopting the technology and reports back
to the decision makers/administrators. If
the technology is adopted, the Beta Group
identifies hurdles and struggles that may need
to be overcome before adoption as well as
begins putting together a clearly identified
process for Professional Development for
other staff.
It is possible that the group decides that this
technology is not a tool that would benefit all
teachers/students in the school. Technology
Integration may actually come in many different
forms. For instance, one set of students may
benefit more from a tablet-like tool, and another
set of students may do better with laptops. Or
different technologies may be offered according
to different activities and needs throughout the
students’ day.
New People/Small Groups
are Trained by Beta Group
This part may seem redundant but I think it’s
beneficial. In essence, you are creating a second
Beta Test Group of new teachers in order to beta
test the Professional Development plan that
will ultimately be deployed to the rest of the
staff. This time, the group may include teachers
who didn’t show an interest in the adoption
of the technology (bribe those teachers with
lots of chocolate to join this new group). When
the original Beta Test Group trains this new group
of people, it is likely that additional technology
may need to be purchased to support the training
and additional needs, struggles, and issues will
be further identified, requiring revisions to the
original Professional Development plan.
Technology is Purchased
for the Larger Group
and Professional
Development is Delivered
Finally, it’s time to “take the plunge.” The
original Beta Test Group, as well as members
from the second group, are the best choices for
leading the Professional Development for the
larger group and should serve as mentors and
support for teachers as they begin using the tools.
New technology is rarely mastered in one or two
sessions of identified Professional Development
time. Teachers will need to know whom they are
able to go to for support throughout the year in
order to become proficient with the tools.
Assess Outcomes (Identified
in Purpose Stage)
This really should be happening throughout
the entire process, but I believe that there
should be some type of formal assessment
(examples: survey, data examination of student
improvement, observation, and even anecdotal
feedback) to see if the technology is actually
meeting the needs identified. This could take
place at an identified time, such as the end of
the school year. It is likely that the assessment
may reveal other uses for the technology that
hadn’t originally been anticipated. It is also likely
that the assessment may reveal problems in the
adoption of the technology: perhaps teachers
aren’t utilizing the tool (due to struggles with
the tool, possibly requiring more professional
development, or their own assessment that it
is not a tool that “fits in” with the rest of their
instruction). It is important to find out if the
tools are actually being used, or if they are
tucked away in a closet. Decisions may be made
by administrators that the technology should be
distributed elsewhere, that retraining is required,
or that expectations should be readdressed
or reevaluated.
In Summary
Technology adoption does not happen
overnight. There are many things to consider,
test out, assess, and learn before large amounts
of funds are spent. What struggles have you
witnessed with new Technology Integration?
Making a Tech Plan
Comments from SchoolCIO advisors:
The plan looks great and would be a nice fit in any district’s I T governance plan,
except making it work in a large school district is almost impossible. C onsider how
many people would need to be at the decision table: technology, professional development,
teacher, principal, curriculum, federal program director, etc. That is a tough
crowd to gather in a room and have agreement.
—John M. Williams, executive director/CIO,
Metropolitan Nashville (TN) Public Schools
The key to good tech planning more than ever is that it needs to start with curricular
and teaching/learning goals, not the devices themselves. I ’ve also been insisting in
our district that we stop thinking about how technology improves student performance,
but how technology can help support best practices that improve student
performance. To me, that is a significant change in perspective of how we select, use,
and evaluate technology efforts.
—Doug Johnson, director of media and technology,
Mankato Area (MN) Public Schools
Bob’s point that I think is really overlooked in education today is that most educational
technology people don’t really have a technology background. They were
teachers who were tech savvy and now are technology coordinators, but they have
no foundation for how networks really work or how all those devices interact, so
there are a lot of issues that will become apparent during the prototyping that
someone with a technology background would see before one brings the device in.
—George J. Weeks, director of technology, Glassboro (NJ) Public Schools
This story does a great job in laying out the plan. You have to have a purpose. W e can
purchase all types of technology, but until the curriculum and professional development
people see the purpose, it will not get used. Starting in small groups is always
easier, but also don’t start with just any small group. The comment about finding the
teachers that are willing to take the risk is very important. I t is also important that
the campus and district administration is a part of the small group.
—Karen D . Fuller, chief technology officer, Klein (TX) I SD